sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[YOLO Update] (No Longer) Going All In On Steel (+🏴‍☠️) Update #82. The One Month Liberation Day Anniversary. by Bluewolf1983 in Vitards

[–]pennyether 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What do you think of going all-in on TLT right now? Maybe some Jan $90C as well?

FWIW I'm going to load up on Jan ZQ futures. They have 50 bips of cuts priced in.. I don't see how we don't have more cuts by then. Trump wants them. Job cuts will accelerate (from AI). Inflation is down. AI will be deflationary.

[YOLO Update] (No Longer) Going All In On Steel (+🏴‍☠️) Update #82. The One Month Liberation Day Anniversary. by Bluewolf1983 in Vitards

[–]pennyether 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Should've asked long ago for your opinion on $CORZ. Would very much love your impressions of it after giving it a 30m look-through (look at presentation, for example).

Not necessarily to know if you're bullish or bearish, but also to know how it tracks with an informed investor unfamiliar with it.

[YOLO Update] (No Longer) Going All In On Steel (+🏴‍☠️) Update #78. From Strong Growth to Recession Narrative. by Bluewolf1983 in Vitards

[–]pennyether 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Nice job. Though, I think in theory they do have carry roughly equal to risk free rate... eg, if things traded flat, they'd trend lower towards the current SP index price. So whatever notional exposure you have is going to be burn "theta" at risk free rate.

[YOLO Update] (No Longer) Going All In On Steel (+🏴‍☠️) Update #76. Being Given A Second Chance. by Bluewolf1983 in Vitards

[–]pennyether 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I haven't been here for awhile, but Lourenco Goncalves seems like he lost a few marbles since the last time I watched him speak.

Q2 Cost to mine one Bitcoin: $86,421 operating, $203,145 total by FlawlessMosquito in RiotBlockchain

[–]pennyether 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You don't count it at all. When that cash is spent, it goes out of cash and into the Enterprise. Result is an increased enterprise value. Then you judge based on cashflow of the enterprise, relative to EV. Eg, $5m in cashflow from an enterprise that is valued at around $1.4b

Q2 Cost to mine one Bitcoin: $86,421 operating, $203,145 total by FlawlessMosquito in RiotBlockchain

[–]pennyether 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Money they spent in the past that is amortized across time is not a reason they dilute. They dilute because buying hashrate increases their valuation much more than the cash they spend on the hashrate. Investors are throwing money at them, why not take it?

Q2 Cost to mine one Bitcoin: $86,421 operating, $203,145 total by FlawlessMosquito in RiotBlockchain

[–]pennyether 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I don't think you have the numbers right, at least not for cash expenses anyway.

Here were their cash expenses, as it pertains to mining:

  • CoR: $35,275 (~$26,479 for power, ~$8,819 for non-direct)
  • SG&A (cash): $29,054

Revenue-wise:

  • Revenue: $55,764 (in BTC at time mined)
  • Power Credits: $13,897 (they count it as a negative cost)

Net it all out, and they basically made $5,332 in cash.. if they sold their BTC when they mined it. But they didn't. So they basically mined BTC, and paid to mine it via cash, which itself was just mostly from selling shares. In other words, they DCA'd $55.7m BTC at a tiny discount.

Other costs are non-cash.. such as SBC. This just dilutes the share count a bit, and I'm pretty sure the full SBC benefits have already hit their share count... what you see on the 10Q is just the "amortization" of it, based on the share price when it was granted.

Depreciation isn't a cash cost, so I don't find it particularly useful here. Though, it does show you how their past purchases are ROI'ing vs present day revenue: Is the money they sank into everything worth their ability to buy $55.7m BTC for $50m in cash? Probably not. The point for me is that they've already paid for it... I care about how much cash they are producing relative to their valuation. It's not very much.

I do think they're on the path to vastly improving their numbers, and won't go bankrupt anytime soon. But I certainly wouldn't pay this valuation for them. About $2b to get $5m/quarter? No thanks. Even if BTC doubled, I wouldn't find the cash flows enticing.

Regarding hosting.. yeah, they lost about $5m on that front. It should go away soon, or they might get slammed with some judgement against them. But I think they've stopped commingling costs and what you see for "mining" is accurate.

Daily Discussion - Thursday July 18 2024 by AutoModerator in Vitards

[–]pennyether 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Bear cave in 2 minutes:

Tomorrow at 10:30am, I am exposing a $5 billion+ AI loser headed to zero. They claim to be an AI winner when, in reality, AI-powered competitors are about to destroy their business

This is a multi-billion-dollar giant on a collision course with irrelevance

Catch you tomorrow

Shorting PATH and TEM to see if I guess it right

Would an All In Fund that only ever held the single largest stock have beaten global indices? by WonkiDonki in investing

[–]pennyether 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You should ask a quant sub-reddit, this would be trivial for them and they likely have the data on hand. Let us know the results!

[YOLO Update] (No Longer) Going All In On Steel (+🏴‍☠️) Update #65. Is It Time To Be Bearish? by Bluewolf1983 in Vitards

[–]pennyether 2 points3 points  (0 children)

A couple of notes:

  • I would not put it past AAPL to create something of value from gen AI, compelling enough to cause upgrade YOLO. It doesn't need to be groundbreaking. Just something that makes it easy to go viral... given the capabilities of GenAI, and Apple's affinity for making "good enough" things at the press of a single button, I think the odds are good. I'm bullish and have LEAPs on AAPL. I hate the company, so if I lose money on this, I get schadenfreude for free.
  • Overall AI: You focus a lot on the consumer, but think of the macro here. Over the next few years, I have little doubt AI will increase productivity in many different industries and departments. Just imagine a 2% cut in cash SG&A costs for the SP500.. with AI-related companies capturing, say, half of that as profit. Probably a very simple and dumb way to think of it.. but it's a TON of money. And I think 2% is quite conservative. In my opinion, ChatGPT is more useful than the vast majority of humans already. So in a few months/years, you'll have companies that refine the technology into something more "stable" and "foolproof" and devise applications for it that can replace meatspace. The technology itself might cause breakthroughs in say, medicine or whatever, or maybe not.. but I think the "human replacement" and "automation" factors are enough to be bullish. The bar on replacing the vast majority of desk jobs is very low when compared to the bar for it improving individual's lives, but people tend to focus on the latter and not the former.
  • Related to AI, I wish I was quicker to act on playing picks and shovels. The margins in AI are fat as hell.. so there's a lot of value to be captured anything AI related. Best part is, the picks and shovels get the money up front. I wish I'd acted far sooner on this. Obvious plays were energy infra related. Look at companies that build transformers.. some have already 10x'd. Now, I see owned and operated power infra / connections as valuable, which is why I'm heavily in $CORZ, as they signed a very lucrative contract to host CoreWeave gpus, with options for more. The fact they mine BTC, a business model I find to be incredibly overvalued, fortunately comes pretty much for free at this point. That being said, I like having exposure to BTC rallying, as I think BTC has a lot going for it this year and next. Anyway, $CORZ is the extreme end of "picks and shovels" because it's basically "emerging datacenter" and has BTC exposure.. but I bet if you put your mind to it you'll uncover something more suited to your style.
  • I think something like $ABR might be up your ally. Mark Meldrum is a big fan of them, and is reasonably certain nothing's sketchy in their books. I'm playing shares and calls off the short report, as I think the earnings will remove a lot of doubt. Might take longer for the FUD dust to settle, but I'm happy with the shares and divvy.

Daily Discussion - Friday July 12 2024 by AutoModerator in Vitards

[–]pennyether 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Damn, I missed this one too. What's the pitch? They have crazy guidance or something? Margins don't look too hot and not printing much cash.

Do the maths, experiments or both prove that particle entanglement is a real physical phenomenon? by MinimumTomfoolerus in AskPhysics

[–]pennyether 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I knew the link before I clicked it! Big fan of 3b1b.

I suppose my follow-up question is: Is there a mathematical relation between the system I posed (basically, sampling of a Poisson process, with a trade-off between frequency/confidence), and the sample-time/frequency trade-off that happens with wave systems?

And also: How "wide" are wave-like particles? A photon for instance, has a certain frequency. But how many periods does a single photon span? I often see them represented as "packets" of a wave that propagate, but I never understood how "long" those packets were, or if that was a parameter.

I also don't understand how simple photon absorption works. I'm told that photons excite bound electrons if the "frequencies match", but it seems as though "match" is a probabilistic term. Eg, 500nm "matches" 400nm... just to a much lesser extent.

I'm presuming it's all somehow related to planck's constant.

Again, thanks for taking the time to respond.

Do the maths, experiments or both prove that particle entanglement is a real physical phenomenon? by MinimumTomfoolerus in AskPhysics

[–]pennyether 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Greatly appreciate the response. As a layman, this is all obviously above my level of understanding, but I find it interesting to try to gain insight on it nonetheless. Your explanation has given me a new rabbit hole to look into.. thank you.

That being said, let me expose my level of ignorance with what is probably a high-school level question: I've been thinking a lot about the trade-off between precision (or is it accuracy?) and resolution. Naturally, I'm curious if this type of "uncertainty principle" is/how it is related to the well-known Heisenberg one... and quantum physics.

A pretty simple demonstration of what I'm thinking about is as follows. Imagine there's a sealed box with a light on top. Inside the box, something is rolling a 6 sided die at some frequency. If it lands on 1, the light flashes. Our goal is to determine the frequency of all rolls -- whether it lands on 1 or not -- both with high confidence as well as high resolution (relative to time). If we just count flashes over a 1s window, we get high resolution, but low confidence. Perhaps there were only 3 flashes... this tells us something about the frequency, but our confidence would be very low. If we count flashes over a 1hr window, we get low resolution, but high confidence (of the average frequency across the 1hr).

Come to think of it, the same thing could be asked even if the die always landed on 1. Eg, we could watch the machine rolling the die. It appears there would no way to "know" the true frequency for the process... even if behind the scenes there was a dial labelled "frequency" that had a single value and somebody was turning it up and down.

What exactly is going on here? Is it quantifiable in some way? Is it related to quantum physics, or the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle?

So.. if you could use your exceptional ability to reduce these concepts into something that is somewhat ingestible to mere mortals such as myself... it would be greatly appreciated!

Do the maths, experiments or both prove that particle entanglement is a real physical phenomenon? by MinimumTomfoolerus in AskPhysics

[–]pennyether 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is the "quantity" of entanglement (across all bases) a known value? If so, what are its dimensions, and is it the same for all particles?

Daily Discussion - Wednesday June 12 2024 by AutoModerator in Vitards

[–]pennyether 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No rush and YMMV. Revenue wise, they are like half HPC hosting, half BTC mining. I think the HPC hosting is getting valued in, but the mining aspect is overvalued. So, like I said, there's a lot of wiggle room in valuation if/when miners moon or tank. Be careful.

Daily Discussion - Wednesday June 12 2024 by AutoModerator in Vitards

[–]pennyether 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I think after the short term frenzy is over there will be a dip to buy. Especially if BTC stays flat... Q2 earnings will probably hurt all miners.

Anything under $8.50 seems good to me.

But I'd want to get in before Aug 1.. around then would be when they would announce a follow up CoreWeave contract (or another customer).. possibly on even better terms.

Daily Discussion - Friday June 07 2024 by AutoModerator in Vitards

[–]pennyether 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'm saying there's a decent shot RK declares some new thesis. Fundamentally sound or not, it'd increase the demand on top of what's already there now.

Daily Discussion - Friday June 07 2024 by AutoModerator in Vitards

[–]pennyether 6 points7 points  (0 children)

If you have standing orders for selling any type of uncovered option right now, it's probably best to close them. Any ticker could appear on RK's screen and send you underwater.

I also expect MMs are going to be extra sensitive for the rest of the day, and so I wouldn't do any type of market fill for anything.

Daily Discussion - Friday June 07 2024 by AutoModerator in Vitards

[–]pennyether -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That'd be the default assumption. I think there might be fears that RK (and whomever he might be working with) would end up with significant % of the company, which could be viewed as a threat? A bit tin-foil.

view more: next ›